Stephan Schaem
1/17/2003 5:49:00 PM
"Michael" <infomike@comcast.net> wrote in message news:e$aK0wdvCHA.2372@TK2MSFTNGP09...
>
> "Stephan Schaem" <sschaem@seriousmagic.com> wrote in message
> news:#nb8FCcvCHA.640@TK2MSFTNGP12...
>
> >My first impression is that Windows Forms is definitely not Win32, good
> thing, but its not that much simpler.
>
> Are you kidding? It takes only a few lines of code to do what it would take
> a hundred lines of Win32 code.
The sample code I seen was still 300 line of so for a pannel with buttons on it.
>
> >(Is the .Net Framework, Windows Forms, based on Win32? a better MFC?)
>
> No. It's not just simply a wrapper over Win32 as MFC mainly is.
>
It seem their is then a possibility that win32 is 'phase out' in the future,
that to say new features/functionality will be added to windows forms but not
win32...
That could be a could reason alone to switch, but the fact that the doc
is visual basic and c# centric, is still a turn off.
On the technical side. If Windows Form are not using GDI, how is the UI being
rendered on the desktop?
> >I personally dont need to write my app in a mix of language, so I dont see
> much Windows Forms benefits over
> >then Win32... so if its all a wrapper for win32 call (ala MFC, WTL) I will
> keep using Win32/C++ native.
>
> I've used all of that and found Win Forms to be the easiest and most
> efficient.
I found the speed of the sample slow, is this to be expected?
Is this because the core UI is possibly not using graphic card acceleration?
Thanks for your experience using Windows Form,
Stephan
PS: This is a big jump, I hope people dont mind me being really critical.